I definitely think dropping Java 6 support would be fine for most users as it's quite old now.
Java 7 is a different story. We still use Java 7 to build our code because many of our corporate clients are still using Java 7 and so we need to be able to build Java 7 binaries for them in the short/medium term. An initial dropping of support for Java 6 should not result in too much screaming ;) > -----Original Message----- > From: Martijn Dashorst [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, 31 October 2015 1:51 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: The future of older Wicket 6.x and 7.x branches > > While it is just recently that we released Wicket 7 requiring Java7, > the Java eco system is moving along faster than our release schedule > can keep up with. > > I'm sure I won't be able to actually build Wicket 6.x releases next > year due to Java 6 not being available (OS X 10.11 removed the Java 6 > installation I had on my box, I was able to re-install it). It was > damn hard to build it now, thanks to Maven requiring Java 7, and the > need for us to use Java 6 to compile and link the wicket jars. > > Wicket 7 will be similarly hard to build soon because of the JavaDoc > mess Oracle inflicted on us in Java 8, and Java 7 being no longer > publicly available with security updates and such. > > IMO this forces our hand to move quicker with upgrading our minimum > required Java version and perhaps even consider that upgrading the > minimum Java version is not a semver violation. > > WDYT? > > Martijn
